But I mean how strong/convincing are the actual versus in the koran in terms of its finality and eternity of message? I don't think it's that strong.
A lot of people refer to Surah Ma'idah verse 3 (5:3), which says:
"This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion."
This is interpreted to mean that the religion is complete and is meant for everyone from that point on, but the wording there is very vague and taken in context, I'm not quite sure what Allah (or Muhammed) is trying to tell us about the rest of the verse.
"Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which hath been invoked the name of other than Allah; that which hath been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by being gored to death; that which hath been (partly) eaten by a wild animal; unless ye are able to slaughter it (in due form); that which is sacrificed on stone (altars); (forbidden) also is the division (of meat) by raffling with arrows: that is impiety. This day have those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: yet fear them not but fear Me. This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. But if any is forced by hunger, with no inclination to transgression, Allah is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."
This verse is also in a very random place in the Quran, so if this was a verse that completed the religion, it seems there's a whole bunch of other rules that came after it. For sure, the Qur'an isn't chronological, but the very verse itself introduces a new rule for the religion, directly after saying the religion is complete.
In summary this seems to say.
"Hey, don't eat certain meats. The religion is complete now, there's going to be no more rules. Btw, there's a new rule, you can eat those certain meats that I said you're not allowed to eat if you really have to."
Those "prophets" of Islam never existed. Guys like Noah, Moses, Lot, Shoaib & Abraham are all fictional and stories surrounding them are fables.
I'm not sure how you've come to that conclusion, I mean, for sure aspects of those stories are complete fiction, but it's difficult to say what is complete myth and not. We can be certain that there was no world-wide flood and even the idea that someone constructed a ship, which sailed afloat during a flood sounds a bit far-fetched in terms of the motivations of the person building the ship etc, but most of these stories could possibly be exaggerations of real events, or even half truths. There may very well have been a Moses, Abraham or Shoaib who believed that they were in communication with a deity, it is often difficult to tell history and legend apart, but their messages in themselves were spurious and even contradictory at parts, so there is little reason to believe they were actually talking to the same being or any being other than themselves.
It's tempting to dismiss these stories as wholly mythical, but there isn't a justification for doing so.
"Be your Own Prophet Make your own religion"
I'm really not sure what this means, it sounds like really bad advice that leads to more complications and divisiveness. Being your own prophet and making your own religion will invariably lead to people treating your like a prophet and following your religion, which contradicts the idea itself.
Also, a prophet by definition is someone that prophesies, makes predictions about the future. Why would you do that?
Topic: previous prophets in islam?